Respiratory Training Prior to Exposure in vivo in the Treatment of Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia: Efficacy and Predictors of Outcome
Abstract
Thirty-two patients suffering from panic disorder with agoraphobia were treated with repeated hyperventilation provocations and respiratory training, followed by exposure in vivo. The treatment was evaluated with a comprehensive set of outcome measures, including self-report questionnaires, a multitask behavioural avoidance test and continuous monitoring of panic. The treatment was found effective for the majority of patients in diminishing the frequency of panic attacks and agoraphobic avoidance. The clinical relevance of the treatment effect was evidenced by the considerable number of patients that recovered. The effect of the treatment was sustained over a three and six month follow-up period. The prognostic value of a number of variables for treatment outcome was also investigated. Three variables accounted for the majority of the variance in treatment outcome: a higher pretreatment level of agoraphobic complaints, use of psychotropic medication and a longer duration of the disorder were associated with poorer outcome. Other variables, such as the therapeutic relationship and the quality of the marital bond, had no prognostic value.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Traditional BRT is seldom tested alone; it is usually mixed with cognitive or behavioral methods.
“Traditional BRT has rarely been tested in isolation but is intermingled with either cognitive (de Beurs, van Balkom, Lange, Koele, & van Dyck, 1995; de Ruiter, Rijken, Garssen, & Kraaimaat, 1989) or behavioral (de Beurs, Lange, van Dyck, & Koele, 1995) techniques.”
From Coping Skills and Exposure Therapy in Panic Disorder and Agoraphobia: Latest Advances and Future Directions (2012) · cites this paper as de Beurs et al., 1995
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 56 · Cited by 43
- Authors
- de Beurs, E., Lange, A., Koele, P., & van Dyck, R.
- Affiliations
- Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- ORCID
- Lange, Alfred
- Venue
- Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1995-03
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 104-113
- ISSN
- 0004-8674 (ISSN-L)
- 1440-1614
- OpenAlex
- W2098942884
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
- Keywords
- panic disorder with agoraphobia, breathing exercises, hyperventilation, in vivo exposure, agoraphobic avoidance, predictors of treatment outcome, psychotropic drugs, treatment outcomes, panic attacks
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Agoraphobia, Arousal, Breathing Exercises, Combined Modality Therapy, Depression, Desensitization, Psychologic, Female, Humans, Hyperventilation, Male, Personality Inventory, Prognosis, Somatoform Disorders, Panic Disorder, Treatment Outcome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review